p.52 #1 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
kurt765 wrote:
Other camera manufacturers seem to have no problem producing better sensors in cameras at lower price points, like the D750. I should give Canon a handicap because with all their success they are inept at producing better sensors at a lower price point? Nope.
The D750 was priced significantly higher when it was first released and its price dropped relatively quickly. Any sane conclusion is that the D750 is nowhere near as profitable for Nikon as it needed to be. And yet what little information there is suggests the 6D still outsells it. Shall we see what price the D750 successor comes in at?
p.52 #2 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Mikehit wrote:
The D750 was priced significantly higher when it was first released and its price dropped relatively quickly. Any sane conclusion is that the D750 is nowhere near as profitable for Nikon as it needed to be. And yet what little information there is suggests the 6D still outsells it. Shall we see what price the D750 successor comes in at?
I believe the D750 was $2200 or $2300 at debut, and dropped to $1999 rather quickly. That is simply Nikon's marketing tactic, they start ~10% over-priced because that takes advantage of the initial rush of pre-orders, then they drop to a reasonable price as soon as the camera isn't sold out everywhere.
Canon was the worst culprit in this particular marketing scheme, for the record, with a solid 3 generations of freaking $8,000 flagship cameras that all dropped to $6K after a year or two on the market.
Let's call a spade a spade here. Between the Canon 6D, 6D2, and the Nikon D610 and D750, Canon is treading water, or going backwards, if you're an ISO 100 landscape photographer at the ~$2K price point. It's that simple. The fact that Nikon flooded the market with Grey D750's at $1400-$1500 is irrelevant, that has only to do with Nikon's warehousing and production line issues. The bottom line is, the D750 has dual card slots, flagship AF, and pretty much everything except 4K video, though a D760 probably will. Oh wait the 6D2 doesn't have that either.
p.52 #3 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
charlyw wrote:
I haven't seen a single photo which was only possible because of the other companies technological advantage - not a single fricking one - all I got to see were inept users using a technology to mask their lack of ability to compose a picture... The worst are those that use that technology to get rid of flash setups to the detriment of the results (i have seen truly horrible results that should never ever have reached the customers)...
I am in complete agreement on the overuse of shadow recovery, not to mention the compressed dynamic range effect that they call HDR. But noise manifests everywhere, not just in the shadows. It's just that we see it more in the shadows. It will however have a significant impact in any low contrast region of an image, because at the point that intensity differences between neighbouring pixels fall into the same range as the signal noise, the spatial resolution of the sensor becomes a function of the noise and not the pixel spacing.
So imaging any low contrast details will directly benefit from lower sensor noise: Complex shapes (say foliage) in mist, tonal gradations in the sky, texture in snow, even highlight recovery in correctly exposed images.
So in actual fact you might have seen images which benefited signficantly from this specific technological advance, you just didn't realise it.
p.52 #4 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Mikehit wrote:
The D750 was priced significantly higher when it was first released and its price dropped relatively quickly. Any sane conclusion is that the D750 is nowhere near as profitable for Nikon as it needed to be. And yet what little information there is suggests the 6D still outsells it. Shall we see what price the D750 successor comes in at?
Sales are not the same as technology. I don't care if they sell more. For me, that matters not at all. I want to capture the most information possible when I click the shutter. Canon, although they have the technology, have opted NOT to include it in the 6D2 sensor. They may have calculated that a lot of people don't care, but I care, and that's why I won't be buying one. Maybe some people will look at sales numbers and say "oh look, tons of people are buying that, so I will too!" but that's not how I choose products. No matter what the price point of a D750 successor, it won't change the fact that the D750 has a better sensor than a 6D2 based on these DPR tests.
p.52 #5 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Nah,, 5Ds is a better camera than 5D3 is a lot of areas not just sensor. Sensor has no banding, shadows DR is better, can push them 1EV more, AF is a better IMO probably due to dual digics, metering is better, you get features from the 1DX for Auto ISO and M mode, it has intervalometer and of course massively better IQ and high ISO noise is no worse when resampled to 20-24MP and shows more detail. Easy to downsample images if 50MP is not needed. Only downside slower buffer clear and bit smaller buffer. IMO 5Ds(R) rendered 5D3 obsolete....Show more →
I'm sure the 5DS is a great camera but it's a different tool for a different market. I personally would not trade my 5DIII for a 5DS because I don't need or want to deal with the large files and I like the extra fps on the 5DIII. If I was a landscape shooter then no doubt I would want the 5DS.
I wouldn't call the 5DIII obsolete, I would call it the best FF value at the moment for $1500.
p.52 #6 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
mb126 wrote:
While this is disappointing from a technical perspective, it's a genius business move by Canon. 97% of their target market for this camera does not care what shadows look like when you push 4 stops and I'm sure they saved a boatload of money on the sensor.
That same 97% of the target market does care about flip screen, DPAF, new AF, more megapixels, etc.
The 6D2 will be a huge success overall as a result.
Exactly....
The 6d2 is an ENTRY LEVEL ff body. Buyers are coming from apsc cameras. The 6d2 is not a 5d4 replacement. The target market will likely shoot in jpeg and dabble in post processing. This camera is also not Sony's competition.
Remember Canon delliberatly makes bodies for market segments. The 6d2 is not targetted for the 5d4 market segment. Basically, the results are expected and anyone surprised or shocked should really give themselves a shake.
p.52 #7 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Mikehit wrote:
The D750 was priced significantly higher when it was first released and its price dropped relatively quickly. Any sane conclusion is that the D750 is nowhere near as profitable for Nikon as it needed to be. And yet what little information there is suggests the 6D still outsells it. Shall we see what price the D750 successor comes in at?
At $1,999, I'll bet Canon won't sell very many of these at all ... and I will also bet the price will plummet almost immediately
Who in their right mind, with $2,000 cash in-hand, would waste their money on this camera ... when there are so many better options to be had
p.52 #8 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Exactly....
The 6d2 is an ENTRY LEVEL ff body. Buyers are coming from apsc cameras. The 6d2 is not a 5d4 replacement. The target market will likely shoot in jpeg and dabble in post processing. This camera is also not Sony's competition.
Remember Canon delliberatly makes bodies for market segments. The 6d2 is not targetted for the 5d4 market segment. Basically, the results are expected and anyone surprised or shocked should really give themselves a shake.
My humble opinion.....
What a st… statement. First the 6D II is not an entry level FF it’s a mid-level FF. Entry level FF are around 1000$ now, 2000$ is a more advanced market. Also, the statement that shooters of a 2000$ Body will mostly shoot JPG is just insane. And why is the 6D II no competition for Sony? An A7 II/ III will appeal to the same market the same goes with the Nikon D750.
Why should a customer choose the 6D II over a D750/D760 or A7 II/III? Just because Canon can sell the 6D II to some hardcore Canon users and still make profit it’s a great camera now? There is no Reason to defend a product that just doesn’t perform. In the end Sony and Nikon users won’t be affected by the performance of the 6D II but you Canon users will.
If Canon had increased the sensor performance, everyone would have applauded. But Canon didn’t and now you can say “I don’t care” and that’s ok. But you can’t applaud to stagnation. Why would you?
p.52 #9 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
FFaccount wrote:
What a st… statement. First the 6D II is not an entry level FF it’s a mid-level FF. Entry level FF are around 1000$ now, 2000$ is a more advanced market. Also, the statement that shooters of a 2000$ Body will mostly shoot JPG is just insane. And why is the 6D II no competition for Sony? An A7 II/ III will appeal to the same market the same goes with the Nikon D750.
Why should a customer choose the 6D II over a D750/D760 or A7 II/III? Just because Canon can sell the 6D II to some hardcore Canon users and still make profit it’s a great camera now? There is no Reason to defend a product that just doesn’t perform. In the end Sony and Nikon users won’t be affected by the performance of the 6D II but you Canon users will.
If Canon had increased the sensor performance, everyone would have applauded. But Canon didn’t and now you can say “I don’t care” and that’s ok. But you can’t applaud to stagnation. Why would you? ...Show more →
What a stupid statement. The 6D2 is Canon's FF entry for Canon users wanting to move into FF. Whether you like it or not, people will very rarely switch brands and they will move through the product line of the camera brand they already have. Will some people switch to Sony? Or Nikon? Sure. But many will also look at Sony's lens line-up and think 'uh, uh'.
When looking at cameras, as well as lenses, and saw all the negative press about the abysmal interface on Sony cameras and that is one thing that put me off. So let's apply the same logic here: isn't it pathetic that a company the size and tech experience of Sony cannot even get the ergonomics right. But that is incorrect isn't it...after all DR at low ISO is EVERYTHING when making a decision.
p.52 #11 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
mogud wrote:
The 6d2 is an ENTRY LEVEL ff body. Buyers are coming from apsc cameras. The 6d2 is not a 5d4 replacement. The target market will likely shoot in jpeg and dabble in post processing. This camera is also not Sony's competition.
I also disagree with this. Some buyers will be coming from apsc, but i think a lot will be upgrading older FF bodies. And whilst it may be an entry level FF body, it is also a $2000 body. The target market for a $2000 body does not shoot jpeg and dabble in PP.
It is not a 5D4 replacement, it is the 5D3 replacement. I fully expect the 5D3 to be discontinued shortly.
p.52 #12 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
mogud wrote:
Exactly....
The 6d2 is an ENTRY LEVEL ff body. Buyers are coming from apsc cameras. The 6d2 is not a 5d4 replacement. The target market will likely shoot in jpeg and dabble in post processing. This camera is also not Sony's competition.
Remember Canon delliberatly makes bodies for market segments. The 6d2 is not targetted for the 5d4 market segment. Basically, the results are expected and anyone surprised or shocked should really give themselves a shake.
My humble opinion.....
I don't know, but I would venture a guess that most people with $3000+ invested in a DSLR and lens(es) aren't just casually shooting JPEGs. Who knows though, maybe there are more than I think. I feel like if you've invested that much just to give up a lot of the advantage of owning such an expensive camera, it defeats some of the purpose. Here in Canada a 6DII and entry level kit lens is $4,050 - that is not money you normally spend to casually fire off some JPEGs. Also, if you've made the decision to upgrade from a crop sensor, it's probably because you want to take your hobby further and are specifically seeking the advantages of full frame along with greater knowledge. In that sense, I'm not sure I'd classify it as entry level, but from a feature perspective it is.
I also think one of the biggest problems for the 6D2 is if/when potential customers look at the competition. If it's true that most users are moving up from crop sensors (or are brand new customers), they likely need new glass too, and are in a position to easily change systems if they see a better value proposition.
Furthermore, if it's true that entry level buyers are the primary target market for the 6D II, new, uneducated buyers just buy based on things they can quantify immediately with minimal research - they will be looking for buzzwords like megapixels, 4K, high dynamic range, number of AF points, FPS, dual card slots, etc.
Another part of me thinks Canon did what they did to the 6DII to help boost 5DM4 sales, where the profit margins are not doubt much higher yet. Probably a smart move from a shareholder perspective. It would be an easier pill for the internet to swallow if the refresh cycle wasn't ~5 years as well, since the competition is going to get updated again in 6-12 months, and possibly even one more time before the 6DIII. As I said before, I believe the 6DII will still be an overall OK camera and successful, it's just disappointing. In addition to this thread, if you want to get some popcorn and head over to DPreview, you can get a sense for how unhappy a decent number of people are on a forum that gets 100X the traffic - 2 or 3 threads have already been completely pulled already haha - that place is always good for a laugh.
p.52 #13 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
kurt765 wrote:
Sales are not the same as technology. I don't care if they sell more. For me, that matters not at all. I want to capture the most information possible when I click the shutter. Canon, although they have the technology, have opted NOT to include it in the 6D2 sensor. They may have calculated that a lot of people don't care, but I care, and that's why I won't be buying one. Maybe some people will look at sales numbers and say "oh look, tons of people are buying that, so I will too!" but that's not how I choose products. No matter what the price point of a D750 successor, it won't change the fact that the D750 has a better sensor than a 6D2 based on these DPR tests....Show more →
Sales are not technology, I agree. But they are a surefire indication as to whether the camera they produce meets the needs of the market. And given that every model of the last 5 years has been panned as inferior because it does not match the DR of the Exmoor sensor, suggests that DR is far from top of the list for the buying public.And for Canon that is the only thing that matters.
Canon's alternative is to put all the things people want in the 6D2 body without increasing the price (4k video, develop higher DR sensor etc). That approach has not worked well for Nikon, has it? How many profit warnings and restructurings have they had in the last 10years?.
But overall, Canon have made decisions based on what their market research says is important in each price band. And they seem to get it right every time. So Canon';s approach is that if dynamic range is so important to you, get the 5DIV (or even the 80D) and if you need to change brands the small number of people who choose to do so is not significant to them.
So that fact you don't like their design choices is a personal preference. To say that Canon have got it wrong is far, far from the mark.
p.52 #14 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
kurt765 wrote:
Sales are not the same as technology. I don't care if they sell more. For me, that matters not at all. I want to capture the most information possible when I click the shutter. Canon, although they have the technology, have opted NOT to include it in the 6D2 sensor. They may have calculated that a lot of people don't care, but I care, and that's why I won't be buying one. Maybe some people will look at sales numbers and say "oh look, tons of people are buying that, so I will too!" but that's not how I choose products. No matter what the price point of a D750 successor, it won't change the fact that the D750 has a better sensor than a 6D2 based on these DPR tests....Show more →
+1. But this is nothing new in Canon land....FF sensor is the achilles heel for Canon after everything since the 5D MKII when they were still leaders in FF tech.
p.52 #16 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
mogud wrote:
The 6d2 is not targetted for the 5d4 market segment. Basically, the results are expected and anyone surprised or shocked should really give themselves a shake.
I have the 80D and the 6DII is aimed at people like me.
For me, though, spending more money for an "80D with a FF sensor" makes sense only if the sensor performs better.
But with the 6DII, I'll be getting 1+ stops better ISO and 1+ stops worse dynamic range (at base ISO).
That is, not a clear-cut upgrade from my 80D.
p.52 #18 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
FFaccount wrote:
What a st… statement. First the 6D II is not an entry level FF it’s a mid-level FF. Entry level FF are around 1000$ now, 2000$ is a more advanced market. Also, the statement that shooters of a 2000$ Body will mostly shoot JPG is just insane. And why is the 6D II no competition for Sony? An A7 II/ III will appeal to the same market the same goes with the Nikon D750.
Why should a customer choose the 6D II over a D750/D760 or A7 II/III? Just because Canon can sell the 6D II to some hardcore Canon users and still make profit it’s a great camera now? There is no Reason to defend a product that just doesn’t perform. In the end Sony and Nikon users won’t be affected by the performance of the 6D II but you Canon users will.
If Canon had increased the sensor performance, everyone would have applauded. But Canon didn’t and now you can say “I don’t care” and that’s ok. But you can’t applaud to stagnation. Why would you? ...Show more →
Didn't say "I don't care" and I also didn't say "I applaud stagnation". All I did say is that this camera has feature upgrades and not bleeding-edge performance improvements because that's what Canon decided. Canon doesn't offer a $1,000 ff body. Truthfully, $2,000 for the 6d2 is priced too high given features and functions.
If you want to debate my post, fine lets do it. The points I made are my take on the camera. they don't agree with your's and I'm good with that.
p.52 #19 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Mikehit wrote:
Sales are not technology, I agree. But they are a surefire indication as to whether the camera they produce meets the needs of the market. And given that every model of the last 5 years has been panned as inferior because it does not match the DR of the Exmoor sensor, suggests that DR is far from top of the list for the buying public.And for Canon that is the only thing that matters.
Canon's alternative is to put all the things people want in the 6D2 body without increasing the price (4k video, develop higher DR sensor etc). That approach has not worked well for Nikon, has it? How many profit warnings and restructurings have they had in the last 10years?.
But overall, Canon have made decisions based on what their market research says is important in each price band. And they seem to get it right every time. So Canon';s approach is that if dynamic range is so important to you, get the 5DIV (or even the 80D) and if you need to change brands the small number of people who choose to do so is not significant to them.
So that fact you don't like their design choices is a personal preference. To say that Canon have got it wrong is far, far from the mark. ...Show more →
You're equating "right" with sales. Sure, from a business standpoint they have been successful. But as a discerning customer I don't care how successful Canon is at selling snake oil, essentially. Their sales success is a piss poor argument for whether a camera is a good camera or not. In fact, it's even irrelevant as to whether or not this is a better camera than the previous version or on par with the current state of technology across all brands including Canon. Being successful at selling crap doesn't make the products sold magically good, and just because it's a "new' sensor in a camera released in 2017 doesn't mean that the sensor is a modern one, clearly.
p.52 #20 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
matthewsaville wrote:
Let's call a spade a spade here. Between the Canon 6D, 6D2, and the Nikon D610 and D750, Canon is treading water, or going backwards, if you're an ISO 100 landscape photographer at the ~$2K price point. It's that simple. The fact that Nikon flooded the market with Grey D750's at $1400-$1500 is irrelevant, that has only to do with Nikon's warehousing and production line issues. The bottom line is, the D750 has dual card slots, flagship AF, and pretty much everything except 4K video, though a D760 probably will. Oh wait the 6D2 doesn't have that either.
Yep, Canon seems to be using the 5DIV to compete with the D750 (and it's a great alternative to the D750) and the 6DII to compete with the D610 (again, a pretty solid alternative if you're fine with lower DR at base ISO).
Unfortunately, the prices don't reflect that. Now, that's fine for the 5DIV - it's also on the D810 level, and is actually a really solid camera from Canon. But price-wise, the 6DII is much more expensive than the D610, and more expensive even than the D750. So landscape shooters will save money and go with the D610 for the better low ISO performance, whereas general shooters will go with the D750.
What Canon really needed to do was come out with a camera that could rival the D750 price, maybe hit the $1500 or $1600 price point, and have 80D like low ISO image quality. Even if it had a release price of $1800, with a couple stops more DR at base ISO it would have been a solid option.
But as it is, the 6DII's barely competitive with current Nikon and Sony offerings, and with the D610, D750, and A7II all approaching refreshes we can expect prices on current cameras to drop even further, and new cameras to be even more capable in the $2000 price bracket (probably a bit more for whatever replaces the D750).
EDIT: With that all said, the 6DII does offer some nice improvements over the 6D. If Canon didn't have any competition, it'd be a nice release for those willing to pay $600 over the 6D to get better AF and a flippy screen.
